Why theistic evolution makes no sense...

I think theists just take the lazy approach. Notice how most things are assumptions and justifications for god would have acted or provide reasons and justification for it. Why can't we simply accept that the answer is complicated and unanswered? Sure it is easy to say that God did it and blindly follow that dogma.

I believe in God for other reasons. This thread was not asking me for those reasons. It was asking me to justify the idea that evolution is consistent with my religion.---One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Platohttp://tinyurl.com/JoinThisIRunIt

#22TheRealJiraiyaPosted 2/2/2013 10:45:10 PM

JonWood007 posted...

I think its kind of beautiful that God shows a preference for complex and intricate methods of working.

Yeah, but without proof of God's existence it kinda seems illogical to go with a complex system as opposed to a simple one. I think a deistic god is possible here, but a human centric one like in the Bible? Doubt it.

Thats the thing, yeah, if you try hard enough, of course you can reconcile religion and science...but the thing is, it's a mess of rationalizations built on no proof.

There is nothing human centric about God. The Bible is human centric because it was written to humans about God's interactions with humans. Just like if I were to write something to you, JonWood007, about how we have interacted, it would be JonWood007-centric.---One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Platohttp://tinyurl.com/JoinThisIRunIt

#23JonWood007Posted 2/2/2013 11:09:16 PM

Well, for starters I think there are good reasons to think God exists(although the complexity/variety of life isnt necessarily one of them)

But to be frank, I dont think any of us are in a position to judge what is 'most logical' for God to have done. We(and here I speak of humanity collectively) dont have even a fraction of a percent of the knowledge he does, and arent even remotely capable of thinking on the same level he is. Rather than debating what God should'would have done, I'd rather look at the world to figure out what he actually did.

That shouldn't stop us from making educated guesses based on the knowledge we have though. I've already beaten this point to death with OW in that 1000 post monstrosity, but saying we can't criticize because we don't have all of the information is kind of foolish. Of course our guesses are fallible, but when new information comes to light I'll change my views.

But anyway, that's not what that post was about. I was talking about you and me. I'm saying it's illogical for us to assume a complex system when it's built on unfounded assumptions, when an equally valid simple one with fewer assumptions is available.

There is nothing human centric about God. The Bible is human centric because it was written to humans about God's interactions with humans. Just like if I were to write something to you, JonWood007, about how we have interacted, it would be JonWood007-centric.

Let's try to follow the logic of theistic evolution from God's perspective:

"So, I have in mind my chosen species and the complete diversity of life on earth. I could just make them right now. Because I'm god and I can do that. But no, instead I'll set them off on a seemingly random process of mutation and selection where the characteristics of my chosen people are carved out by the strong mercilessly slaughtering the weak. After billions of years of systematically purging the weak to select for the strong traits I desire, I shall have my chosen species."

It really doesn't make any sense at all.---"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."-- Leon Lederman

#25SirThinkALotPosted 2/4/2013 6:43:07 AM

squareandrare posted...

Let's try to follow the logic of theistic evolution from God's perspective:

"So, I have in mind my chosen species and the complete diversity of life on earth. I could just make them right now. Because I'm god and I can do that. But no, instead I'll set them off on a seemingly random process of mutation and selection where the characteristics of my chosen people are carved out by the strong mercilessly slaughtering the weak. After billions of years of systematically purging the weak to select for the strong traits I desire, I shall have my chosen species."

And you don't find anything silly about a supposedly loving god using a needlessly brutal method to accomplish a goal that doesn't require the brutality? I understand that you emotionally need to reconcile this nonsense, but think for a second about what you're actually saying.

Besides, whoever said God's plan was limited to humans?

Did I say it was?---"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."-- Leon Lederman

#27SirThinkALotPosted 2/4/2013 7:57:37 PM

squareandrare posted...

And you don't find anything silly about a supposedly loving god using a needlessly brutal method to accomplish a goal that doesn't require the brutality?

I actually think evolution is kind of beautiful in how it works. That all life is connect, molded through this slow and complex process...*shrugs*

Did I say it was?

Not explicitly, but you did heavily imply it. Particularly when you(using God's voice) refereed to humans as the 'chosen species' as if we were the only one....---Learn real history and economics at liberty Classroomhttp://www.libertyclassroom.com/dap/a/?a=1305

#28squareandrarePosted 2/4/2013 8:27:47 PM

I actually think evolution is kind of beautiful in how it works. That all life is connect, molded through this slow and complex process...*shrugs*

Beautiful, sure. But it's also indescribably brutal. Can you imagine how much suffering went into evolving complex pain receptors? Then think about phantom limb pain, "locked-in syndrome," and other ghastly byproducts of evolution, and then tell me that this was the best idea god could come up with.

Not explicitly, but you did heavily imply it. Particularly when you(using God's voice) refereed to humans as the 'chosen species' as if we were the only one....

"Theistic evolution" usually means the belief that god directed evolution towards man. That's the context I was using it in. And I did say that god had the "complete diversity of life on earth" in his plan.---"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."-- Leon Lederman

#29SirThinkALotPosted 2/4/2013 11:35:18 PM

squareandrare posted...

Beautiful, sure. But it's also indescribably brutal. Can you imagine how much suffering went into evolving complex pain receptors? Then think about phantom limb pain, "locked-in syndrome," and other ghastly byproducts of evolution, and then tell me that this was the best idea god could come up with.

Eh, as I said before, I'm not concerned with 'the best God could come up with.' I'm concerned with what he DID come up with.

Er...no. It simply means that the statements 'God exists' and 'evolution occurred' are both true statements. Presumably creating mankind was part of what God had in mind, when God created the universe and/or jump started evolution, but theres no reason to think it was his sole or even primary purpose.---Learn real history and economics at liberty Classroomhttp://www.libertyclassroom.com/dap/a/?a=1305

#30squareandrarePosted 2/5/2013 6:32:53 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

Theistic evolution or evolutionary creation is a concept that asserts that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and (by consequence) all life within, and that biological evolution is simply a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life.

The term has been used to describe being a theist and believing in evolution, but in that context, it doesn't make sense to say "theistic evolution." Evolutionary theory does not take a stand on the existence of god, so there is no need to qualify it with "theistic" unless you think a deity influences it.---"Physics is not a religion. If it were, we'd have a much easier time raising money."-- Leon Lederman